医学教育管理

• 调查研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

临床医学神经外科学博士学位论文质量影响因素的实证研究:基于双盲评审数据的分析

  

  1. 1.北京市神经外科研究所教学办公室,北京 100070; 2.首都医科大学附属北京天坛医院教学办公室,北京 100070
  • 收稿日期:2025-12-24 修回日期:2026-01-12 出版日期:2026-04-13 发布日期:2026-04-13
  • 基金资助:

    首都医科大学校内建设性项目(2025校内项目-10900-19000201)

An empirical study on factors influencing the quality of doctoral dissertations in clinical neurosurgery: analysis based on double-blind review data

  1. 1. Teaching Office, Beijing Neurosurgical Institute, Beijing 100070, China; 2. Teaching Office, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100070, China
  • Received:2025-12-24 Revised:2026-01-12 Online:2026-04-13 Published:2026-04-13

摘要:  目的 探讨临床医学博士学位论文质量及其关键影响因素,为完善培养质量保障体系提供实证依据。方法 回顾性分析2021—2025届94名临床医学神经外科学博士生的282份双盲评阅书,收集人口学特征、培养过程关键节点(开题、中期)及选题来源等数据。采用Spearman相关分析、单因素及多元线性回归分析筛选影响总评分的独立因素。结果 学位论文总评分中位数为85.00分,整体质量处于中高水平。在分项指标中,“论文成果的创新性”得分最高,且与总评分相关性最强(r=0.859,P<0.001)。多元线性回归分析显示,中期检查“优秀”是学位论文总评分的独立正向影响因素(β=3.318,P=0.021);相对于国家级课题,选题来源于“其他课题”是总评分的独立负向影响因素(β=-2.718,P=0.025)。入学年份、攻读方式及是否获得毕业生荣誉等变量对总评分的影响差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 临床医学博士学位论文整体质量良好,创新性是核心评价要素。中期评价结果和选题来源是影响论文质量的独立预测因素。建议培养单位强化中期考核的筛选与激励功能,同时优化非国家级课题选题的科研资源配置及过程指导,以系统性提升博士学位论文质量。

Abstract:

 Objective To investigate the quality and key influencing factors of doctoral dissertations in clinical medicine, so as to provide empirical evidence for improving the training quality assurance system.Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted on 282 double-blind peer review reports from 94 clinical neurosurgery doctoral candidates from the graduating classes of 2021 to 2025. Data on demographic characteristics, key training stages (proposal defense, mid-term inspection), and research topic sources were collected. Spearman correlation analysis, univariate analysis, and multiple linear regression analysis were used to screen independent factors influencing the overall score.Results The median overall score of the doctoral dissertations was 85.00, indicating a medium-to-high overall quality. Among the sub-evaluation indicators, "innovation of dissertation achievements" scored the highest and showed the strongest correlation with the overall score (r=0.859, P<0.001). Multiple linear regression analysis indicated that an "excellent" result in the mid-term inspection was an independent positive influencing factor for the overall score (β=3.318, P=0.021). Compared with national-level projects, dissertation topics derived from "other projects" were independent negative influencing factors for the overall score (β=-2.718, P=0.025). Variables such as year of admission, study mode, and whether graduates received honors had no statistically significant effect on the total score (all P>0.05).Conclusion The overall quality of clinical medicine doctoral dissertations is satisfactory, with innovation being the core evaluation element. Mid-term inspection results and topic sources are independent predictors of dissertation quality. It is recommended that training institutions strengthen the screening and incentive functions of the mid-term assessment, and optimize scientific resource allocation and process guidance for topics derived from non-national projects, so as to systematically improve the quality of doctoral dissertations.

中图分类号: